BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BNKS.L (iShares S&P U.S. Banks) and FNCW.L (SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF) are both Financials Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD, from iShares and State Street respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BNKS.L returned 26.30%/yr vs 24.05%/yr for FNCW.L. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BNKS.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for FNCW.L.

Performance

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P U.S. Banks (BNKS.L) and SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BNKS.L is traded in USD, while FNCW.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FNCW.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BNKS.L achieves a 3.61% return, which is significantly higher than FNCW.L's 0.18% return.

BNKS.L

• 1D: 3.49%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: 3.61%
• 6M: 7.51%
• 1Y: 27.90%
• 3Y*: 26.30%
• 5Y*: 4.76%
• 10Y*: —

FNCW.L

• 1D: 1.96%
• 1M: 2.03%
• YTD: 0.18%
• 6M: 4.44%
• 1Y: 14.42%
• 3Y*: 24.05%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BNKS.L iShares S&P U.S. Banks	3.61%	20.45%	28.55%	-3.74%	-13.74%
FNCW.L SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF	0.18%	29.48%	26.62%	15.72%	-7.92%

Correlation

The correlation between BNKS.L and FNCW.L is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2022	0.76

The correlation between BNKS.L and FNCW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BNKS.L	FNCW.L
Financial Services	100.0%	98.2%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	0.1%
Healthcare	-	0.1%
Industrials	-	0.2%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	1.3%
Utilities	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BNKS.L

BNKS.L Risk / Return Rank: 36
BNKS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
BNKS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
BNKS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BNKS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
BNKS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 31

FNCW.L

FNCW.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FNCW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
FNCW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
FNCW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FNCW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 35

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P U.S. Banks (BNKS.L) and SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	BNKS.L	FNCW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.33	1.06	+0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	1.61	+0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.18	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	1.26	+0.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.55	4.21	+0.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNKS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is comparable to the FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNKS.L and FNCW.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BNKS.L	FNCW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.33	1.06	+0.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.20	0.85	-0.65

Drawdowns

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNKS.L drawdown since its inception was -51.35%, which is greater than FNCW.L's maximum drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNKS.L and FNCW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNKS.L	FNCW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.35%	-21.99%	-29.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.88%	-11.42%	-5.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.47%	-15.90%	-12.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.58%	-1.92%	-3.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.75%	-4.46%	-13.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.12%	3.41%	+2.71%

Volatility

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P U.S. Banks (BNKS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.48% compared to SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L) at 3.87%. This indicates that BNKS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNCW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BNKS.L	FNCW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.48%	3.87%	+2.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.85%	10.67%	+5.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.82%	13.61%	+7.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.66%	16.96%	+10.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.51%	16.96%	+14.55%

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BNKS.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FNCW.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

BNKS.L vs. FNCW.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BNKS.L nor FNCW.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNKS.L and FNCW.L in my portfolio?

BNKS.L and FNCW.L have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BNKS.L or FNCW.L?

On fees, FNCW.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BNKS.L or FNCW.L?

FNCW.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BNKS.L.

What is the main difference between BNKS.L and FNCW.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Financials NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BNKS.L and 0.30% for FNCW.L.